HISHILAMO Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the year 2007, the petitioner was a Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Tingrat, Tehsil Udaipur, District Lahul & Spiti and recommended the name of Amar Nath who is also a co-accused, in I.R.D.P category, who otherwise was a PWD contractor. Thus, on the complaint, a case was registered in terms of the FIR No.7/13 dated 24.4.2013, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 171-G of the Indian Penal Code and Section 125-A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 in Police Station Udaipur, District Lahul and Spiti.

(2.) THE petitioner was apprehending arrest for the non-bailable offences, as such filed the present application for pre-arrest bail. Vide order dated 24.5.2013, an interim bail was granted. She is stated to have joined the investigation of this case. No recovery is to be effected from her and as per I.O. ASI Roop Singh, P.S. Udaipur, some of the witnesses of the Panchayat are yet to be associated and their statements recorded. Further the co-accused Amar Nath has already been granted bail today itself.

(3.) HOWEVER , it is made clear that the petitioner who is a woman accused, she shall be interrogated with all decency by the police as per the directions issued by the Apex Court and also by this Court from time to time. It is further made clear that if any of the bail conditions are flouted by the petitioner, the liberty of bail shall be cancelled.